The Guardian has run an entirely uncritical interview of Tulip Siddiq on the day that her trial begins in Bangladesh. She’s making the same points as usual…
The ex-corruption minister said she had no intention of turning up: “I’m yet to see an official summons … I mean, I’m supposedly days away from a showcase trial in a foreign country, and I still don’t know what the charges are against me. I feel a bit like I’m trapped in this Kafkaesque nightmare where I’ve been put on trial and I genuinely haven’t found out what the allegations are and what the trial is about.” As prominent journalist writing on Bangladesh David Bergman points out, if Siddiq had any intention of interacting in good faith with the legal process there she could have appointed a solicitor in Bangladesh to represent her interests. She has not done so and continues to claim to be oblivious to everything…
She blamed the memory of her “elderly parents” for her apparent failure to realise that a flat in King’s Cross had actually been gifted to her by an Awami-League-linked developer. She also refused to distance herself from ousted dictator Sheikh Hasina: “I’m not here to defend my aunt… I know there’s an investigation going on about how her term in government ended. And I really hope the people of Bangladesh get the closure that they want.” Guido has extensively covered the Awami League’s proximity to the Labour party and Tulip in recent years. Siddiq remained silent as the UN accused her aunt’s regime of killing children…
Siddiq maintains she is “collateral damage” in a political dispute between Hasina and Bangladesh’s interim leader Muhammad Yunus. She was formally indicted in Dhaka last week and the trial – which relates to alleged impropriety in new land allocation – is set to begin today. Tulip has always denied wrongdoing. Siddiq’s lawyers have said in a statement: “For nearly a year, the Bangladesh authorities have been making false allegations against Tulip Siddiq. Ms Siddiq has not been contacted or received any official communication from the court and does not and has never owned any land in Purbachal.” The trial begins today.
This week 701,253 visitors visited 810,256 times viewing 862,334 pages. The most read and shared stories in order of popularity were:
- Sky News Embarrassed After Attacking Farage for ‘Project Fear’ Over Rising Crime
- Civil Servants Give Each Other Tips on How to Flout Office Attendance Rules
- Trump Could Still Block Starmer’s Chagos Deal After House Appropriations Intervention
- Jenrick Demands Law Society Withdraws Mad New ‘Race and Equality’ Guidance
- Starmer Abandons Growth for ‘Living Standards’ Interventions in Next Budget
- Labour Using ‘Analysis of Reform Voters’ From Hope Not Hate
- Rushanara Ali Resigns as Homelessness Minister
You’re either in front of Guido, or you are behind…
Former North of Tyne mayor Jamie Driscoll looks to have abandoned the far-left splinter party he set up just a few months ago. Oh no! Anyway…
In the “Who we are” section of the new Your Party Corbyn/Sultana website it is explained: “For donation processing, MoU Operations Ltd (Company number 16359847) acts as the data controller. MoU Operations Ltd is responsible for collecting and processing personal data associated with donations made via this website and any related financial transactions.” Jamie Driscoll is one of the three directors of MOU Operations Ltd…
So Driscoll is the data controller for Corbyn’s new operation. Interesting seeing as he set up a party of his own in December of 2024 with some fanfare – it even fielded a candidate in the locals. The “Majority” party is also fully registered with the Electoral Commission – something that can’t be said for Corbyn’s outfit. Driscoll can presumably help with that now he’s parked his own nascent party…
Marc Andreessen, one of Silicon Valley’s top venture capitalists, personally reached out to Downing Street last week to complain about the censorious Online Safety Act. Following widespread backlash against the legislation which has already blocked memes, Wikipedia articles, and a picture of Starmer’s head on a baby’s body…
According to the FT, Andreessen even called for Starmer to slap the wrist of Peter Kyle after he insisted critics of the Act were “on the side” of sex offenders and Jimmy Savile. Since that attack line came from Number 10 itself, Andreessen’s suggestion will probably fall on deaf ears…
‘Independent expert’ and tax lawyer Dan Neidle is raising the alarm over Gordon Brown’s call for a slew of gambling tax hikes. Neidle published a blog this morning in which he warned that whacking enormous taxes on the industry inevitably hits the gambler, not the gambling companies, and that the Institute for Public Policy Research’s (IPPR) proposal is flawed. If even Neidle is saying it…
“We need to be careful about trying to raise additional revenue from “sin” taxes. The revenue may be less than we expect, and what revenue we do receive may (in economic terms) come from customers rather than the businesses making the sale.
Personally I see compelling arguments for reducing the harms caused by gambling; but I’m unconvinced tax is a good tool for doing that. Regulation may be a better approach.
A tax increase may still be worth doing as a revenue-raiser. But any argument for an increase needs a more robust revenue estimate than the IPPR’s use of a static calculation and illustrative tables. And it needs to acknowledge who is actually paying the price.”
Rachel Reeves is nonetheless laying the groundwork to introduce such a sin tax at the budget anyway. Maybe Dan will be putting in a few calls to dissuade her…
Speaking at his speech on how to achieve “progressive capitalism” Wes Streeting fired a dig and Andy Burnham:
“Bond markets are not bond villains and fiscal rules matter.”
